"Secondly, Hymns and Mass are not a Traditional combination." Speaking for the Central Europe, I have to oppose that. It is very traditional, at least in the sense of "very old custom" (several hundreds of years). But singing hymns at Mass in Latin definitely is not - hymnody has always been here for the people and so it must be understandable. The whole of the congregation hasn't ever been expected to understand Latin. Thus the hymns have always been generally vernacular.

We sing Latin hymns all the time at the SSPX church I attend regularly, but there are some factors contributing to this:

1) The choir has been used to using the New Saint Basil for decades and doesn't feel comfortable making a trek into polyphony land just yet, and having a contrafactum to a tune you already recognize makes life so much easier.

2) Our choir director is half our age (I'm in my early thirties, mind you) and is still learning his craft. (He had "Gloria Laus Honor" listed for singing last Sunday, until someone pointed out that this was too soon.)

I might add, in reference to the Latin Mass I mentioned above that the unfortunate practice of singing sad, out-of-context Latin hymns at the beginning and end of Mass, along with the priest saying the Latin prayers at 100 mph, with absolutely zero opportunity for congregational participation, helped ensure an anemic attendance at that Mass which was the excuse the pastor used to cancel it at the first chance he had.

Here's the real irony of it all: the people of the parish, by virtue of the fact that they were exposed to almost everything the EF Latin Mass should not be, according to the "essential criteria" of Vatican II, were thus effectively immunized against ever desiring the Latin Mass in any way, shape or form again. One other sad result is that those of us who worked for years to bring the Latin Mass to a local parish were relieved in some way that this Mass was taken off the schedule, precisely because of the damage it was doing by teaching the people what a Latin Mass should not be, and, by doing this, reinforcing the worst of the liberal prejudices and stereotypes of the Latin Mass. I think it can truly be said that at this particular parish, the "conservatives" did more to destroy the desire for the traditional Mass than the "liberals" ever could have, and they did this by playing into every false, stale liberal canard hurled against the traditional Latin Mass.

To those who want to impose all-Latin, all-the-time, (along with an all-male schola!) at the EF, I'd just say, "Be careful; you might end up being your worst enemy, and you may end up destroying any chance of success with the Latin Mass more than any "liberal" ever could. Instead, stay within the rubrics and the nigrics (I just discovered that word the other day in Cardinal Ratzinger's book!) to create a paradigm of the ancient Roman rite that will appeal to as broad a spectrum of the Catholic faithful as you can."

I guess to some I sound like a wild-eyed, hippy, flower-child, liturgical kook, but I think Cardinal Ratzinger's and Cardinal Sarah's advice about following the "essential criteria" of Sacrosanctum Concilium apply here---that we should be very careful about ending up with a paradigm of the EF Latin Mass which seems to be "irreconcilably opposed" to the OF:

"This is why it is very important to observe the essential criteria of the Constitution on the Liturgy, which I quoted above, including when one celebrates according to the old Missal! The moment when this liturgy truly touches the faithful with its beauty and its richness, then it will be loved, then it will no longer be irreconcilably opposed to the new Liturgy, providing that these criteria are indeed applied as the Council wished."

To those who want to impose all-Latin, all-the-time, (along with an all-male schola!) at the EF, I'd just say, "Be careful; you might end up being your worst enemy, and you may end up destroying any chance of success with the Latin Mass more than any "liberal" ever could.

This is called "Letting the fussbudget be the enemy of the good."

I would like a vernacular hymn if we did the Asperges. Being a diocesan parish, the TLM is last, and so we do the Introit instead. At the end, we usually do the Marian anthem, and then we process in silence, to a hymn, or, usually when it is allowed, the organ.

I was referring to within Mass when I mentioned vernacular hymns. Of course they are allowed at Low Mass.

Both male and female voices have their place.

I just wanted to make it clear that vernacular hymns are allowed as entrance and closing hymns at the EF Sung Mass (and during an EF Low Mass) according to the rubrics of the 1962 Missale Romanum since it didn't seem clear in the OP.

Re: an all-male schola, I apologize for bringing up that particular controversy, but I and other women I know have first-hand experience with the (unpleasant) praxis of excluding women from singing the propers, and while it is perfectly legitimate to do so de jure, it seems to me if there are de facto competent, willing women chant scholars, they certainly ought to be offered a place in singing the texts of the Mass. To exclude them seems to me to perpetuate unnecessarily the false perception that the traditional Latin Mass is an exclusive male, clerical domain, and that women and the majority of the laity are consigned to be completely passive and silent, an attitude that was pretty much repudiated by the "essential criteria" of Sacrosanctum Concilium.

It has been my experience that if one has the opportunity to present the EF to an OF parish, the least successful paradigm is one in which the people are kept completely silent and women have little or no role (in the schola). I just don't see the majority of Catholics having much sympathy for that model. Perhaps it works in isolated communities, but I don't believe it has very much appeal in large metropolitan parishes.

BTW, I see that SSPX America recently put out a newsletter in which a lay (male) music director stipulated that it was preferable for men to sing the propers. I wish I could tell him that is not the praxis of SSPX France where mixed scholae are largely in use, and women are being trained to be chant masters.

Charles, Paul Weber was the DM, so that made the difference.

Of course it would make a difference. He is one of the best. A local organist was one of his students and speaks highly of him.

I am delighted to add "nigric" to my vocabulary.

The New English Hymnal has many ancient seasonal Latin antiphons and canticles which have lovely English translations fitted to the original chant melody with keyboard accompaniment. It seems to me one could use these with the original Latin, too.

The 1906 edition is online here: http://imslp.org/wiki/The_English_Hymnal_(Various)

(Re: rubrics and nigrics, here is the quote from Cardinal Ratzinger's book, where he is quoting his professor of liturgy, Joseph Pascher:

"It is not enough to observe the rubrics---the external ceremonial directions; much more important is the claim of the nigrics---the inner demand made by what is printed in black, that is, by the liturgical text itself, which as such includes interaction in hearing and responding, in prayer, acclamation and song."

p. 586, Collected Works: Theology of the Liturgy)

I serve as music director for St. Anne Church in San Diego, a FSSP parish. For the most part, I program vernacular hymns outside the mass as entrance and final hymns and "stuff" the mass with Latin hymns whenever possible. Our pastor has expressed an interest in the faithful getting to know both vernacular (English and Spanish, in our case) and Latin hymns. So, personally, I can't imagine not singing Latin hymns.

Julie, thanks for all your research and obedience with regard to not making things needlessly narrow. I concur with your findings as to the actual teachings of the Church regarding sacred music, and gladly accept competent authority over the preferences of individuals, esteemed colleagues though they may be.

The point I make is this:

Learn from the mistakes of the past do not repeat them over again.

The seeds of destructive habits in liturgical music is in imposing music into it which does not fit the character of the mass, and is of protestant origin, or is of arbitrary , drastically different melodic character. A clash of melody a clash of theology, etc.

What is needed is a hymnal which draws upon the mass ordinary, tropes, sequences, processional hymns from the pre-16th c. time period. Piae cantiones and a number of the solesmes books fill that void, but they do not exist in the "vernacular".

Currently, the vernacular hymnals used, even by most members of this forum, are not truly suitable for Catholic worship - at least not in the mindset of "historic liturgy" and "early music". They are not absolutely evil - simply seriously flawed - in one way or another. They fit a modern post-protestant influence of liturgy. They are really far removed from the ideal - far removed from history. If your goal is to compromise and work within what has developed, than you will think I am strange, but if you want what is actual historic practice you will be on the exact same page as I am.

It is my assessment that someone needs to begin work on a vernacular hymnal that is totally original in terms of translation. Which draws strictly from the latin liturgy of long LONG ago. A hymnal that gives a coherent tasteful liturgical clarity which is based upon plainchant, rich theological poetry of a patristic model and simple polyphony.

Until one stops imposing protestant hymns into the mass, the roots of destruction will be ever present and the inherent individualized notion of do it yourself freestyle melody will continue to permeate western latin christianity.

I am a proud supporter of G.R.O.S.S., although not dogmatically so.

About the same here. Had a micro-choir (EF) and two of the four men (self included) could easily do the Chant--the other two were...ahhh....chant-challenged. So we included the women, one of whom was a rock-star soprano who knew how to be a choral singer, too. (There were 4 women; the other 3 were not detriments.)

Took a lot of heat from a very ignorant priest-celebrant over that. Another "purity over reality" guy. When I had 12 competent men in the prior assignment, we went men-only, b/c it works very well, indeed.

Interesting question.
We do English hymn (yes, singular) as processional/recessional. It seems silly to do a verse or 2 to get the celebrants in and then do a different hymn for several verses to get them out, so we finish the hymn. They're using the Campion Missal, so we'll use hymns from there...and there are only a few in Latin. We did do Adeste fideles for Christmas; it works out much better when people know the tune well and only have to struggle with the words.

As for other Latin hymns, my group does chant much better than polyphony right now, so we sometimes use them as offertory motets. They're particularly nice in that function because they're easy to stop when the action needs to go on.

If you do a hymn, sing all the verses each time, or as many as possible, e.g. what is in the hymnal. The M.C., celebrant, and DM should agree on how many verses to stay in place at the front and back (so, at the altar at the recessional and at the back of the nave for the procession to the altar).

Matt, could you please convey that concept to every single altar server/MC with whom I've ever worked?

Haha. Bill Riccio taught me to MC. And when I would serve the OF at home I always looked back for a cue, usually a good two verses in. Father goes to the chair, then he charges the thurible for the incensation of the altar after the hymn as the Introit starts. At the recessional, he leads because he knows how long the hymn will be.

Also, organists: please prepare an improvisation for the Last Gospel. It is supposed to be prayed “under” music at Sung or Solemn Mass. Then we can do the Marian antiphon and a hymn or organ music. And if we like the hymn, we will wait longer. COE FEN and LOVE UNKNOWN will keep me in place longer...

It is supposed to be prayed “under” music at Sung or Solemn Mass.

That looks like ICK practice, but not US practice. You have documentation?

It's definitely said secreto. Fortescue-O'Connell-Reid says as much, p. 146 of the 2003 edition. O'Connell says the same, p. 514 of the 1963/64 edition (which, despite the date, is only in conformity to the changes of the 1962 missal), adding that the formation for the recession forms during it. Reid in the 2009 edition includes the restrictions of De musica sacrawhich says nothing about the Last Gospel. Although English, it is safe to say every Anglophone sacristy has those two books somewhere (it's almost impossible to find L. O'Connell from Mundelein...).

From the perspective of it being silent, it makes sense that you "mind the gap" at that point. It's a musical liturgy. I'm in a distinct minority for parts of my position, but at sung/solemn Mass, you really shouldn't have moments that are good for thumb-twiddling. I do understand the need for silence, but I find the prayer is elevated when the organ is there. One, it 's beautiful. Two, it keeps the mind from wandering. So, even during the second half of the Canon I think one should improvise if one is able, and one either has to watch or have someone watching for the genuflection before the Per ipsum. Reid says one should not do this, but he mistakenly applies the restrictive parts of DMSto sung Mass, whereas the document actually recommends "devout silence" during the latter part of the Canon and does not positively exclude the organ. Had it done so, one would wonder why it did not also abolish the choral Benedictus.

So in-between the Kyrie and Gloria, the Alleluia and Gospel (only the best can do this), before the homily (in a larger church where the pulpit is not near the altar or at Pontifical High Mass), before the Credo (same problems as for the previous point), during the Offertory if no other music is sung, the same for Communion, and during the Last Gospel.

If your celebrant doesn't want music during those two points-the Canon and the Last Gospel- then that's OK, but I find it to be less than preferable.

The Dominican practice is in fact to extinguish the candles at this point. It is their historical protest against it being required to be said at the Gospel corner. FWIW.

The gap between the Alleluia and Gospel is usually minimal or non-existent in a Missa cantata, so there wouldn't be room for organ improv. However, the situation is very different in a solemn Mass where there might be as much as a minute between the end of the Alleluia and the singing of the Gospel by the Deacon. In my opinion it is appropriate for the organ to accompany the liturgical action at this point.

CCooze, on Sundays, yes, that would also be a place to improvise; we do the Introit as the procession at my home parish so there is no sprinkling. I also suppose that means you start the Introit when the celebrant is definitely at the altar with the ministers.

I was thinking of Solemn High Mass. We really try to time it for everything to be in place for the jubilus of the repeated Alleluia...but let's just say that doesn't always happen, as Arthur said. I would also think that the organist would be using the preceding chant, so it wouldn't be such a dramatic musical difference.

At Solemn High Mass before the homily, it covers the Per evangelica dicta and the incesnsation of the celebrant plus his doffing of vestments. I am in favor of doffing the chasuble as well as the maniple. That means a trip to the sedilia if he is preaching or if the deacon is preaching.

After the homily it covers the departure from the pulpit and sedilia and the retrieval of vestments. It's also a fun way for the organist to give the incipits. I've heard it go badly wrong when the priest was still replacing his maniple and the organist only gave it once, and too early at that.

I watched the video last night, actually. I might have asked for music. But I wasn't the MC so, what can I say? That's also the one point I'm flexible about...

Yes, I agree. I suspect he forgot they have to pray the Introit & Kyrie

He did that well, I thought.

Matthew, have you ever read Liber Organi, a beautifully handwritten book by Fr. Fortescue in which he describes how an organist may accompany the Sung Mass?

https://charlescole.files.wordpress.com/2013/07/fortescue-gry.pdf

I've been privileged to attend Sunday Masses artfully accompanied by Aristotle E. of this forum so, thanks to that experience, I have a very good idea of what you you describe and what Fr. Fortescue outlines. For those organists capable of the fine and delicate art of improvisation, it can indeed offer a beautiful finishing touch and ornamentation to the Sung Mass.

Speaking of Latin hymns, Jeff Ostrowski is offering a Latin hymn for Lent set to the tune of Herzliebster Jesu (with psalm verses). We sang this in English (Ah, Holy Jesus) as the recessional at our Missa Cantata last week, and so many people, including Father, loved it. Many thanks to Jeff for making this available in Latin and for the lovely harmonization. We will be singing this as our Communion motet this Sunday.

This seems really strange to me.

It sometimes seems strange to me too, Adam. But what always seems strange is the habit of singing until the priest is where he's supposed to be, and then stopping. At that point, you've barely learned the hymn (esp. if it's some new thing that doesn't scan...but we don't do those). I'd much rather present all the verses of a hymn, so it can be understood as poetry (even if fragmented).

As for timing, we used to be able to see, but now the view of the side door is blocked by an organ (! - yes, we now have 2). So we start on the bell (all or part of hymn on organ, depending on familiarity.) Usually, they'll wait most of a verse before moving. Unless the verses are really short, the priest will be in place by end of 2nd verse. Sometimes he has to walk a half dozen steps without music, or kneel through most of a verse, but generally the timing is pretty close.

Today being the 18th Anniversary of the death of our parish priest, Fr. Alfred Kunz, whose murder is still unsolved, it is fitting that I commemorate him by giving thanks for the education we were privileged to receive under his tutelage. Fr. Kunz had an august presence at the altar, and his preaching was an "Event." We learned that the Mass stood on its own merit, and that the sublimity of silent moments should not be feared and need not be stuffed with sensory extras. Even his Low Masses on weekdays were enthralling. The limited and inadequate metaphor that I can best use to try to describe them, is that they were like attending an artful foreign language film with subtitles, and at the close of the film, not having missed the absence of spoken English dialogue one bit. So it was with his Low Masses celebrated on weekdays: The reverence with which he approached them, the silence, the spoken word - all these had elements of musicality attached to them, so that it was as if music had been ongoing throughout the liturgy. Having been exposed to that makes me less mindful of whose attention span issues or boredom I am expected to alleviate as organist/choir director at High Mass. Yes, I make use of choral music, preludes, postlude, interludes and short-fillers where appropriate, and then just let blessed silence envelop the church for the rest of the moments. The second half of the Canon is one portion where I particularly don't want to receive extra incoming auditory stimulation.